joz8968

iTrader: (13)

Just not heard of that martial art before. Bit like Kung Fu, no?


"I know Kung Fu."

hodgy0_2

Not sure tbh,

It is Korean in origin - like most plays heavily on high personal standards, self control, honesty yada yada

Has both defensive and offensive elements

He did it for 5 or 6 years - then simply quit,

He never really told us why, he did have a lot on at the time, with his singing etc I think he was 10ish when he stopped

I always thought it was a tiny bit pseudo religious if I'm honest

Rpschesterfield

My hero

BoozyDave

iTrader: (8)

you are talking about parents that work for a living, shifts or working away is work

At the junior school that both my kids went to, they have 'reading morning' once a week and 'inspire morning' once a month. Out of the few parents that were there, most of them had taken time off work or similar. The unemployed parents just leave their kids at the gates to walk into school on their own [5 years old] eating a packet of tesco value crisps for their breakfast!

School teachers are not miracle workers, if parents don't give a **** about the education of their own children, how much can teachers achieve?

If parents try to help their children, and are willing to use their spare time to raise money to help the school, why shouldn't teachers favour those kids?

I wonder how different schools would be in run down areas if the parents helped out at the school. If all those unemployed parents stayed at school (instead of rushing home to smoke weed and watch Jezza) to help out, become non teaching assistants/ help with a school allotment/ organise fundrasing days or events, the school would have more money and teachers wouldn't be under as much pressure.

It's too easy to blame 'the system' for kids not getting good grades

joz8968

iTrader: (13)

What, the kids or their parents?

BoozyDave

iTrader: (8)

Why edit out the middle of my post to try to be funny?

Do you think it's funny that parents neglect their kids and think it's ok to give their kids a packet of value crisps for breakfast?

How much does a bowl of cereal cost? or 2 slices of toast?
A bowl of value cornflakes with milk will have more nutrition and help concentration more than any 18g bag of value crisps

joz8968

iTrader: (13)

Blimey, keep your hair on.

Only making a bit of light hearted fun, with a non-serious, throwaway comment. Jesus.

Torquemada

lol, I have to say, I was ignorant of this martial art, also. I thought you were talking about the No. 16 meal at a local Chinese restaurant. This might help more http://www.uktsdf.org.uk/About

Re GCSE's, they are a joke. Too easy and not a measure of any real worth in real life, IMHO. A-levels are a bit better and then degree's a little more. However, I hate employing people who have just come out of university and those who have degree's with no other experience. Most I have come across are thick AF and really don't have an ounce of common sense. I prefer those with a personality and some real gumption/work ethic, above those with a certificate. Both here in US and in UK.

Also, how is it that so many come out of Uni who cannot spell or write a sentence. (although I make many mistakes with my English, too. I know nobody is perfect!)

markjmd

iTrader: (11)

Isn't this all just down to expectation though? As far as I was aware, GCSEs have never been intended as anything more than a way of measuring a pupil's academic abilities in a given subject at a given stage in study, yet for some reason you (and many others in this thread) seem to think they're being touted as something far more significant. The same applies also for university degrees. As an employer, if you're expecting someone fresh out of uni to have anything more than a good theoretical grounding in the subject they've studied, and a better than average aptitude to pick up new information relatively quickly, then I'd have to say the problem is with your understanding of what a degree is, and not with the person you've just hired (or perhaps just turned down for a job).

Just to repeat, I'm not singling you out personally for criticism here, your post just happened to be one of the most recent in this thread, and was also quite typical of the attitude I've just commented on.

hodgy0_2

Yes, I think you are right

GCSE's in themselves are simply a measure of academic performance in a set of subjects at a given time

They don't really measure "common sense" "practical ability" or a Childs ability to "graft" and most crucially social skills

My son is quite lucky, he is bright and blessed with a phenomenal memory

Most of his school friends seemed to have done even better than he did (I don't really know any of them though)

But he has a friend from the village - who finds academic work a challenge. However Adam is one of the most engaging young adults I have met, with fantastic social skills - unbelievably hardworking and industrious, setting up a mini gardening business to the elderly in the village, buying, repairing them selling Xbox's on eBay

In short I think he will be very successful in life even though "academically" he struggles

Turbohot

Yes, that's correct. GCSEs are a basic education measure, which everyone is expected to pass, and rightly so. Anyone with average intelligence and parents that recognise the importance of education, clear mind, satisfsctory home life and happy social life, optimum school support and generally good health can get good grades in the GCSEs; without having to toil and burn the midnight oil.

The ones that struggle doesn't mean they're below average with their intelligence. GCSEs test the ability to absorb, but the ability to absorb can be influenced by some negative factors in life, although such absorption ability is generally inherent to most people.

Super intelligent breed is a different breed and often with atypical type members to it. For example, a genius with dead father; more siblings, working mother and hand-to-mouth environment, would still study under a lamp post if the lights had to go off, in order to save expense. He/she would do so without any encouragement whatsoever from anyone and fill his/her room's wall with equations and sums, get top grades and one day, become something phenomenal. That's what I call a natural and defiant extra-ordinary ability against all odds; despite lacking all hunky dory environment and supportive figures around him/her. This particular genius I mention actually struggled severely against the elite ones in further job related competitions who had the support of their elite parents due to their 'it's not about what you know, it's about who you know' trump card. But he still got there. Utmost respect to him. I can't name him here, but having him as someone very close to us has been a tremendous privilege.

Norman Dog

iTrader: (1)

My son achieved 9 A* grades and only missed out on getting 10 by one point.

He is already being headhunted by Cambridge university.
I am immensely proud of him.

http://www.shieldsgazette.com/news/l...ults-1-8088624

BoozyDave

iTrader: (8)

Nice one, well done

Torquemada

No offense taken at all!

You're quite right, I agree, they're just an "where are you at now and how is the next bit gonna go" indicator, as are common entrance exams before that and A-Levels afterwards; it seems as though the media puts a massive focus on them though - I do think this is daft as they are not really challenging nor a particularly good indicator of anything aligned to a young persons future potential, imho.

I do think that there should be a better, more accessible, better explained/publicized, variety of tests at this stage. I think there should be more that are aimed to test/entice those who may go into the varying types of roles/responsibilities/challenges/vocations that people are likely to go into.

At least they are better and more focused, in the UK, than the education system here is - it's basically all general knowledge stuff until college....that really is daft.

I am saying that I have found many people who have just come out of college/uni nowadays to be plain idiotic. I don't just mean that they are young and directionless etc. I understand precisely what to expect from whatever degree that someone has focused on (I get why you mentioned it though, all good.) I really do mean unable to absorb new information and then utilize it, accordingly.

Context is the technology marketing and sales world and applies to persons I have experienced with varying degrees; from business studies/admin, to marketing, to communications and psychology and may many others.

A large part of my role is training, lol. I see varying levels of aptitude across all staff I hire/train/work with, to be fair. More often than not, though, I am shown that the value of a degree is actually far less than it tends to be given by many. Again that's all just in my experience, of late, and maybe that has been a little influenced by the dumb-asses I have had to deal with recently

Torquemada

fyi, I am really not saying that any kids who have gotten 10 x A* are dumb. I respect those who worked hard enough to gain good grades.

GCSE's where the thing when I was younger, not O-Levels, and a massive majority of kids in my year had multiple or maxed out number of A* grades.

What I am saying is that this shows there to be no real indicator or differentiation between those kids, in essence. It means that the tests are not fit for purpose, again that's imho.

I think there needs to be another way of differentiating and grading kids.

p.s. if there already is in the UK and I have missed that change, then I apologize!

p.p.s sorry for all the Americanized spelling, I am trying to fit in

hodgy0_2

Yes,

GSCE's are no guarantee that teenagers/young adult have what I term "the basics"

To me these are the ability

To smile and look someone directly in the eye when talking to them
Be punctual
Speak/communicate clearly
Show interest and enthusiasm
Be polite

And lastly

Do what you say you are going to do, when you say you are going to do it

So many people I meet in and out of business, young and old simply fail at the basics

Peedee

iTrader: (4)

Is there actually any direct proof that GCSE's are now considerably easier than they were, say, 15, 20 odd years ago? I fully believe they are, but then there's a part of me that thinks that kids are getting brighter, but then another part of me thinks that maybe it's not so much the kids, but the facilities they have to help them along the way. I mean, look at what kids have now compared to 20 years ago, namely the Internet. They all have tablets, smartphones etc. In my day, if you needed information on something, you had to go and get a book, speak to someone etc, now it's a case of popping onto Google and within 10 seconds you have the answer, which obviously makes life, and studying, CONSIDERABLY easier and less stressful. For example, if I wanted to find out how many feet were in a mile, I'd have to go and find out which would entail first of all asking every adult I knew (even if one person did know, you'd have to double check it anyway), then I'd have to go to the library and get a book. Now, I type 'distance converter' into Google and bobs-your-uncle, I can get every single measurement of distance converted to whatever within a split second.

It's not really any wonder so many kids get straight A's or 9 A* grades when they have so many facilities to achieve this. Don't get me wrong, I do appreciate that a level of 'knuckle down-ness' and discipline is obviously required to achieve such grades, but surely you just have to look at the percentage of kids getting these grades now compared to what it was 15-20 years ago to realise the 'value' of GCSE's is getting less and less?

hodgy0_2

I think one of the big changes, over "our" day is the concept of continual assessment and course work

It obviously favours the diligent hard workers, and any initial bad marks gained in coursework can be redone - to uplift the final mark

And also the grade boundaries were static i.e if 90% gets you a A, then no matter how many students get 90% they get an A

But we are now moving to the "all on the day - **** or bust" type regime that we used to have (this year is the last of the continual assessment)

This obviously favours the inherently brighter students who can turn up to the exam and "pull a blinder"

And I suspect more of a move to movable grade boundaries where the top 10% get an A (and so on),

Turbohot

Well done to your son, Norman Dog.

Well done to the ones who aren't being head hunted for Oxbridge etc. as well, and to the ones who failed and will be re-sitting. Nothing is lost, all is well done, even if not brilliantly done. Success or failure, they all teach us something, so everything is a gain. Life is competitive, but believe that just being good with your books isn't everything. If you're good at heart and awake at mind, you're still a winner. Easy and just keep going.

BoozyDave

iTrader: (8)

My youngest is 8 and sometimes his homework is just a question on a piece of paper like 'spanish armada?'
He has had no explanation or training on the subject, but types it in to google, the copies one of the quotes. He gets full marks!

If I ask him about it 3 months later, he hasn't got a clue what he wrote!

Schools and teachers should teach students properly, then mark the students work on individual work, not just give them full marks because they can type something into google and copy out what they have found

TonyBurns

iTrader: (3)

Thats pretty good my niece got 1 A and 10 A", she is brainy though, got the max score in the mensa test too

pflowers

Far too much emphasis is put on exam results these days.

I left school at 16 in the mid 80's and it was very much that the really academic kids went on to college, uni etc and followed a path to a good job, accountancy, legal profession etc etc.

The rest of us got a job, maybe on a YTS or similar and worked our way up the job ladder.

Out of my circle of friends it was a mix of both and we have all done equally well, however those who took the work route tend to be more outgoing, adaptable, versatile and more likely to be running their own business. Those who took the 'professional' route tend to be stuck in a rut - albeit a well paid one.

My eldest two, 19 and 17 are now employed in the family business out of choice, my 19 year old got mostly A*'s and is a very clever girl, however in a customer orientated environment is not the best. My 17 year old struggled big time with mild learning difficulties needing the help of a teaching assistant through most of his schooling. He ended up taking GCSEs but got no grade c's or above. However in a work environment he's switched on, outgoing, great at handling situations and awkward customers and full of brilliant ideas. I often hear customers saying to him 'if you get fed up here son, come and work for me'

I'm all for results and college / university for those who need that route to prosper, however many can and will do very well without it, society should embrace them equally.

Turbohot

https://www.gov.uk/government/upload...at_Britain.pdf

Chapter 2 is worth a read re. social mobility in terms of the meritocracy in education.